Mammali Vs. Pakki

Mammali vs Pakki

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 02, 1884

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/776600

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/776600
Court: Chennai
Judge: Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J. and ;Kernan, J.
Decided On: Apr 02, 1884
Subject: Civil;Property

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil Procedure Code, Section 32 - Suit for maintenance by a member of a Malabar tarwad--Necessary parties--Joinder of parties by Appellate Court. -

Key legal issue: Civil;Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mammali

Respondent

Pakki

Legal References

Reported In: (1883)ILR7Mad428

Excerpt

civil procedure code, section 32 - suit for maintenance by a member of a malabar tarwad--necessary parties--joinder of parties by appellate court. - charles a. turner, kt., c.j. and kernan, j.1. it is admitted that an arrangement has been made, assigning properties to the several tavarais for the maintenance of their members. the appellant asserts that it is insufficient, and he claims for himself an allowance of rs. 10 from the karnavan. he cannot maintain suit unless he brings all the members of the tarwad before the court, for they may be all affected by the decree; of coursesome may be impleaded as representatives of the whole body. but there was no reason why these persons should not have been made parties in the appellate court. we set aside the order of the judge and direct him to proceed under paragraph 2 of section 32 of the civil procedure code.2. the costs of this appeal will abide and follow the result.

Full Judgment

Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J. and Kernan, J.

1. It is admitted that an arrangement has been made, assigning properties to the several tavarais for the maintenance of their members. The appellant asserts that it is insufficient, and he claims for himself an allowance of Rs. 10 from the karnavan. He cannot maintain suit unless he brings all the members of the tarwad before the Court, for they may be all affected by the decree; of coursesome may be impleaded as representatives of the whole body. But there was no reason why these persons should not have been made parties in the Appellate Court. We set aside the order of the Judge and direct him to proceed under paragraph 2 of Section 32 of the Civil Procedure Code.

2. The costs of this appeal will abide and follow the result.

Same Parties Mammali vs Pakki Same Subject Civil;Property Same Judge Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J. and ;Kernan, J.

Civil;Property